Internet access authorization and regulation systems and methods for controlled environment of an institutional facility

ABSTRACT

Access and regulations systems to facilitate safe and secure access of web content by residents of an institutional facility such as a correctional facility includes an administrator workstation to define authorized and prohibited web content, a resident workstation displaying on a predetermined list of web content, and a server receiving and processing the authorized and prohibited web content and requests made by institutional residents.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The field of the invention relates generally to administrative systemsfor institutional environments, and more specifically to Internet accessauthorization and regulation systems and methods for institutionalenvironments such as correctional facilities.

Various types of institutional facilities are known that house residentsin a controlled environment. Such institutional facilities include, forexample, correctional facilities such as prisons and jails, hospitals,convalescent homes, long term care facilities, nursing homes,psychiatric facilities, rehabilitation facilities and developmentaldisability facilities. Activities of residents in such controlledenvironments are in some cases restricted, and a high degree ofsupervision is exercised over the residents. This is especially so incorrectional facilities housing incarcerated individuals, often referredto as inmates. As a result, significant administrative difficultiesexist in such institutional environments, including but not limited tocorrectional facilities, that do not necessarily exist in otherenvironments.

Networked computer systems exist in many institutional facilities today,but tend to be closed access systems that are carefully restricted formost users. In the correctional facility context, inmates may beauthorized for limited use of existing systems to purchase goods from acommissary service, schedule appointments, make telephone calls, sendand receive emails or messages to and from persons outside the facility,access inmate financial accounts administered by the facility, obtaininformation and announcements from the facility, etc. Such systems mayalso process commissary orders from inmates, accept deposits and debitinmate financial accounts for purchases or other transactions, andotherwise streamline management of the facility.

While existing computer systems designed to meet the needs ofinstitutional environments have made great strides to date in providingboth increased convenience to institutional residents such as inmatesand reducing efforts on facility administrators to provide and overseevarious services and activities, they have yet to completely meet theneeds of the marketplace and improvements are desired. In particular,any ability to effectively implement online access to the Internet in asafe and secure manner for at least some residents of an institutionalfacility is sorely lacking.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Non-limiting and non-exhaustive embodiments are described with referenceto the following Figures, wherein like reference numerals refer to likeparts throughout the various views unless otherwise specified.

FIG. 1 is a simplified block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of akiosk-based Internet access authorization and regulation systems for anin institution housing residents in a controlled environment.

FIG. 2 is an expanded block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of aserver architecture of the system shown in FIG. 1.

FIG. 3 is another simplified block diagram of the architecture shown inFIG. 2.

FIG. 4 is an algorithmic flowchart of exemplary processes associatedwith the Administration Application shown in FIG. 3.

FIG. 5 is an algorithmic flowchart of exemplary processes associatedwith the Resident Application shown in FIG. 3.

FIG. 6 is an algorithmic flowchart of exemplary processes associatedwith the Secure Access Application shown in FIG. 3.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

In order to understand the inventive technology described herein to itsfully extent, some discussion of the state of the art is warranted belowin Part I, followed by exemplary embodiments of systems in Part II andexemplary processes associated with the system in Parts III, IV and V.

I. Introduction and State of the Art

For a variety of reasons, resident access to the Internet has generallybeen prohibited in controlled environments of institutional facilities,including but not necessarily limited to correctional facilities.Existing software controls designed for non-institutional environmentsare not practical for controlled environments of institutions and theparticular issues associated with the type of controlled environmentsthat they present.

A wealth of information is now available online and accessible via theInternet. For the general population, managing the accessibleinformation available on the Internet can be challenging because theInternet provides a mix of helpful and unhelpful, if not harmful,content for the typical user. For discussion purposes herein, the term“web content” as used herein shall refer to websites, webpages, and weblinks accessible to a person via the Internet. A website typically is acollection of webpages made available at a particular domain, a webpagerepresents a portion of the website that a user can interact with whenvisiting a website, and web links are hyperlinks presented on a webpagethat provide a path to another webpage or website if selected by a user.Some websites and webpages can be quite sophisticated, and may include arelatively high number of web links to other webpages of the samewebsite and/or other websites. A variety of web browsers are known thatallow persons to search and access websites and webpages.

In use, web browsers allow a user to enter an address of a particularwebsite or webpage when known, or alternatively to enter general searchcriteria. Search engines, often affiliated with the web browsers, arealso known that return a list of websites or webpages that may relate toa search query made by a user. Software is also known that is designedto filter and block selected Internet websites having certain types ofcontent for certain users. Known web content filtering and blockingsoftware, such as popular parental controls and the like, is typicallyintegrated with or operates in tandem with web browsing software.

According to predefined criteria set by one type of user (e.g., aparent), known filtering and blocking features may allow with differentusers (e.g., one or more children) Internet access with prohibitions toaccessing certain web content defined by the predetermined criteria,while also allowing one user (e.g., an adult) to monitor the activity ofanother user (e.g., a child) when accessing the Internet. As such, knownfiltering and blocking software provides some ability to track Internetactivity of certain users and preclude their access to certain types ofweb content. Nonetheless, known filtering and blocking software stilloffers a vast degree of freedom for users to access a wide variety ofwebsites and content that would be undesirable, if not unacceptable, ina controlled environment of a correctional facility or otherinstitutional environment housing residents in a controlled manner. Inother words, browser-based software generally provides an ability tomonitor Internet activity and filter/block access, based onuser-provided preferences and criteria, to broadly defined categories ofinformation available via web.

The accuracy of such browser-based filtering/blocking software issometimes better than others, and such browser-based software typicallylacks controls for user to strictly review and control the accuracy offiltered or blocked search results that may otherwise be made available.Apart from web content related to user-provided filtering/blockingpreferences, however, browser-based filtering/blocking softwaregenerally provides unfettered access to a vast amount of the contentavailable on the Internet. Controlled environments demand essentiallythe opposite approach to that of known browser-based filtering/blockingsoftware, namely an ability to provide access to a limited amount ofmaterial, while otherwise restricting, if not entirely precluding,unfettered access to a vast amount of the content available on theInternet.

On a related note, certain types of known filtering and blockingsoftware removes entire websites from being returned in search resultsand/or blocks access to entire websites that are identified asobjectionable. However, websites are not uncommon that offer a mix ofmaterials, some of which may be objectionable to certain users and someof which may not be objectionable. This includes popular sites such asYouTube that present very kid-friendly video materials as well asgraphic material and other content that is adult oriented. Some knownwebsites themselves also include age gates and the like in which a usermust certify his or her status as an adult to view certain types ofcontent. Generally, however, the user is guided by his or her owndiscretion, or lack thereof, in making decisions to view certain typesof content. While known software packages may work reasonably well forhouseholds involving a relatively small number of people, or even forbusiness environments where access to certain websites or content can beuniformly blocked, they are disadvantaged for a relatively largepopulation of residents in a controlled environment such as acorrectional facility. Average residents such as inmates or patients incertain types of treatment facilities cannot be trusted and sometimesare not capable of exercising sound discretion when browsing online.

Indeed, the concept of a web browser is altogether contrary to the needsof an institutional environment such as a correctional facility in whichsecurity issues and a need to closely monitor inmate activitypredominates. Because of a general lack of adequate controls andsafeguards available to institutional facilities today to monitor andprevent improper or inappropriate use of the Internet by facilityresidents, Internet access by institutional residents such as inmatesand certain types of medical patients in an institutional treatmentfacility is generally not made available in many controlledenvironments.

On another level, browser software is also known that provides anability to “browse” content of all drives on a local computer machineand/or other computer machines that are connected and accessible on anetwork. Such abilities are wholly undesirable for residents ofinstitutional facilities in controlled environments.

While Internet access prohibition to date in many controlledenvironments of institutional facilities is perhaps understandable,there would be benefit to at least some residents such as inmates ofhaving some access to the Internet. For example, inmate access to someappropriate information available on the Internet is hardlyobjectionable, and there may be good reason to allow institutionalresidents at least some access to the Internet. More specifically, andas non-limiting examples, access to healthcare sites and medicalinformation on the Internet, access to specific portions of the UnitedStates Social Security Administration website, access to certaineducational materials, and even access to some news or entertainmentssites, would not be unreasonable for many institutional residents suchas inmates. However, there is no existing means that reliably provideslimited access only to such specific type of information or web contenton the Internet for residents of controlled environments, whilegenerally excluding other types of information or web content on theInternet, and while facilitating strict supervision and oversight bycontrolled environment administrators and personnel. It would bedesirable to provide institutional residents such as inmates access onlyto unobjectionable information in a manner that would not overly burdencorrectional facility officers and administrators to manage in a safeand secure manner, and it would likewise be desirable to institutionaladministrators to tailor limited access to only certain web content tomeet specific needs of certain residents.

General purpose proxy servers and firewalls may be utilized to somedegree to prevent access to certain websites in a controlledenvironment, but lack flexibility and ease of use for controlledenvironment administrators of institutional facilities to effectivelymanage access across a population of residents having different needs.Such proxy server and firewall arrangements tend to provide an all ornone solution in which it is difficult to accommodate different degreesof access to different residents as desired.

II. Exemplary System and Architecture of the Invention

Exemplary embodiments of controlled Internet access and regulationsystems and methods are described hereinbelow that address the problemsdiscussed above and resolve longstanding and unfulfilled needs in theart.

As explained in detail below, exemplary embodiments of controlledInternet access and regulation systems provide secure systems/methodsthat give controlled environment institutional facilities such ascorrectional agencies granular control over Internet access byresidents. The controlled Internet access and regulation systems allowfacility administrators, including but not limited to correctionalfacility officers, to identify specific web content each incarceratedindividual (inmate) may access, as well as reliably tracking Internetusage by inmates, while also reducing the burden on facilityadministrators to oversee the online access by inmates with convenientgrouping tools. Method aspects will in part be implicit and will in partbe explicitly discussed in the following description, and whiledescribed primarily in the correctional facility context, the benefitsand advantages of the exemplary embodiments may accrue to other types ofinstitutional environments or even non-institutional environmentswherein controlled access is desired.

FIGS. 1-3 illustrate aspects of an exemplary controlled environmentadministration system 150, that in one embodiment is a computer programor software embodied on a computer readable medium and utilizing, forexample, a Structured Query Language (SQL) with a client user interfacefront-end for administration and a web interface for user input, access,and information retrieval and reports. The administration system 150 maybe web enabled and may be run on a business-entity intranet oralternatively may be fully accessed by individuals having an authorizedaccess outside the firewall of the business-entity through the Internet.In an exemplary embodiment, the system 150 may be running in a Windows®environment or operating system that is commercially available fromMicrosoft Corporation of Redmond, Wash. The application may be flexibleand designed to run in various different environments withoutcompromising any major functionality.

FIG. 1 is a simplified block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of thesystem 150 including a server system 152, and a plurality of clientadministrative sub-systems 154 and client residential sub-system 155,connected to the server system 152. Computerized modeling and groupingtools, as described below in more detail, are stored in the serversystem 152 and can be accessed by a requester at any one of the clientsystems 154 and 155. In one embodiment, certain of the client systems154 and 155 are computers or other electronic devices including aspecialized application, such that the server system 152 is accessibleto the client systems 154 using existing local area network, wide areanetwork or a secure connection over the Internet while other of theclient systems 154, 155 are not provided with a web browser so that onlya limited and predetermined set of web content is made available asfurther described below.

The client systems 154 or 155 may be interconnected to the specialsecure access application server, described below, through manyinterfaces including, for example, a network such as a local areanetwork (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), dial-in-connections, cablemodems and special high-speed ISDN lines. The client systems 154 may beany device capable of interconnecting to the Internet, run anapplication and have the ability to use standard network protocols toconnect to secure access application server including a web-based phone,personal digital assistant (PDA), or equivalents thereof. The ability toconnect to a network allows client systems 154 and/or 155 to be remotelylocated from the server 152, such as, at a correctional facility, amedical facility, another institutional environment or anon-institutional environment. A database server 156 is connected to adatabase 158 containing information on a variety of matters, asdescribed below in greater detail. In one embodiment, the database 158is centralized and stored on the server system 152, and the database 158may be accessed by potential users at one of the client systems 154 or155 by logging onto the server system 152 through one of the clientsystems 154 or 155. In an alternative embodiment, the database 158 maybe stored remotely from server system 152 and may be non-centralized.

FIG. 2 is an expanded block diagram of an exemplary embodiment of aserver architecture of the system 150 including the server system 152and the client systems 154. The server system 152 may optionally includethe database server 156, an application server 160, a web server 162, afax server 164, a directory server 166, and a mail server 168. A diskstorage unit 170 may be coupled to the database server 156 and thedirectory server 166. The servers 156, 160, 162, 164, 166, and 168 maybe coupled in a local area network (LAN) 172. In addition, a systemadministrator's workstation 174, a user workstation 176, and asupervisor's workstation 178 may be coupled to the LAN 172.Alternatively, workstations 174, 176, and 178 may be coupled to LAN 172using an Internet link or are connected through an intranet. One or moreof the workstations 174, 176 and 178 may include an administratorinterface application, described further below, for use by institutionalfacility administrative personnel or other persons to control the use ofthe system 150 by institutional residents such as inmates or otherpersons exclusively to limited and preauthorized or predetermined webcontent.

In contemplated embodiments, each workstation 174, 176, and 178 may be apersonal computer or other electronic device having a web browser.Although the functions performed at the workstations typically areillustrated as being performed at respective workstations 174, 176, and178, such functions may be performed at one of many personal computerscoupled to the LAN 172. Workstations 174, 176, and 178 are illustratedas being associated with separate functions only to facilitate anunderstanding of the different types of functions that can be performedby individuals having access to the LAN 172.

The server system 152 in one embodiment is configured or adapted to becommunicatively coupled to various individuals via some of the clientsystems 154, including resident workstations 180 and 182 associated withthe institutional facility for which the system 150 is associated usingany standard local area or wide area networking technology includingcellular data, broadband, MPSL, T1 or ISDN, VPN over Internet. Thecommunication in the exemplary embodiment is illustrated as beingperformed using T1 lines, however, any other wide area network (WAN)type communication can be utilized in other embodiments. That is, thesystem 150, and its operating algorithms and processes described beloware not necessarily limited to being practiced using T1 lines.

In an exemplary embodiment, any authorized individual at a workstationcan access the server system 152 via one of the client systems 154.Workstations 180 and 182 may be personal computers or other electronicdevices having a resident application interface described below,sometimes referred to as an inmate application interface. Workstations180 and 182 may also be kiosks, in one example embodiment, similar toairline kiosks located within airports that allow passengers to check-inand print their own boarding passes without the assistance of an airlineemployee. The stand-alone kiosk may include a display screen to provideinformation to a user, and also may include an input device, such as akeyboard, a mouse, or a touch screen, positioned at least partiallywithin a protective casing. In exemplary embodiments, a touch screen isa preferred input device compared to a mouse or a keyboard because atouch screen is more rugged, and less prone to damage than a mouse or akeyboard. Additionally, third party customers may communicate with theserver system 152 via a workstation 190 having, for example, a webbrowser.

The fax server 164 may communicate with remotely located client systems154. The fax server 164 may be configured or adapted to communicate withother client systems including but not limited to the workstations 174,176 and 178 as well for reporting purposes.

The functionality and programming of the system 150 is explained indetail below with respect to the methods and processes described in thealgorithms detailed below. The technical effect of the processes andsystems described herein is achieved when data and selections pertainingto authorized and prohibited web content, user information, and requestsare supplied to and accepted by the administration system 150. The dataand selections used by the system 150 may be supplied to and accepted byany of the workstations connected to the server system 152 as describedabove, or may be supplied from other sources if desired. Exemplary dataand selections utilized by the system are described in some detailbelow.

The data and selections supplied to the system 150 may be stored orarchived in the aforementioned server system 152, and the data andselections may be accessed by the system 150 to permit a reliableInternet access, regulation, tracking and oversight system with limitedeffort by facility administrators.

Referring now to FIG. 3, the system 150 is further illustrated as shownwith Administration Applications 200 provided in each of the facilityadministrator workstation 176 and the facility supervisor administratorworkstation 178. Resident Applications 202 are likewise provided in eachof the resident workstations 180, 182 for use by a resident such as aninmate. The Administration Applications 200 of the workstations 176, 178and the Resident Applications 202 of the workstations 180, 182communicate with a Secure Access Server 204 provided with a SecureAccess Application 206. The Secure Access Server 204 communicates withthe database server 178 and a proxy server 208 as further describedbelow.

While an exemplary embodiment of the system 150 having two residentworkstations, two administration workstations, and one access server isshown, the system 150 is scalable to accommodate any number of desiredusers at the workstations provided. That is, additional applications200, 202 and 206, additional workstations 176, 178, 180 and 182, andadditional servers 204 may be provided in various embodiments. Varyingnumbers of users, such as institutional residents and administrators orother persons, may be accommodated depending on the number ofworkstations and servers provided.

It is also contemplated that in further/and or alternative embodiments,personal computer devices, notebook or laptop computer devices, computerkiosk devices, or tablet computer devices running various knownoperating systems may be employed and utilized in lieu of or in additionto one or more of the workstations 176, 178, 180 and 182 provided thatsuch devices are provided with the appropriate one of the applications200 or 202.

Of note, and as will become evident below, the system 150 does notutilize a web browser at the resident workstations 180, 182 madeavailable to a resident (e.g., an inmate or patient of a controlledenvironment institution) or other user. All requests for web contentmade via the resident application(s) 202 at the workstations 180, 182are processed through the Secure Access Server 204 and the Secure AccessApplication 206 and confirmed against approved and/or disapprovedcriteria per the Administration Application 200 and input from thefacility administrators or other overseer via the administrationworkstations 176, 178. A resident such as an inmate has no ability toinput or otherwise search for web content with the resident application202, but rather may merely make a selection from a pre-authorized andcategorized list of content as determined from the facilityadministrators or overseers via the Administration Application 200. Anefficient use of groups for residents (e.g., inmates) and authorized (ordenied) web content access sets renders a highly effective system withreduced ongoing effort by facility administrators and overseers. Thesystem 150, via the Secure Access Sever 204 and the Secure AccessApplication 206 may also intelligently track activity and use byresidents and inmates in a substantially automated manner.

The processes utilized in the system 150 and the applications 200, 202,206 therein will now be explained. Algorithms may perform the processesdescribed without violating known HTML and TCP/IP standards andprotocols used to create web content on the world wide web.

The processes described below may be implemented conventionally in acomputer program (or programs) embodied on a non-transitory computerreadable medium and having segments of code or instructions executed bythe computer(s) described that correspond to and effectuate the variousfunctions and features of the processing of web content requests andadministrator criteria and preferences described. The technical effectof the processes and systems described herein is achieved when data andselections pertaining to authorized and prohibited web content, data andselections administrative preferences, data and selections relating touser authorization criteria, and data and selections relating toresidents requests are supplied to and accepted by the controlledenvironment administration system 150. The data and selections used bythe system 150 may be supplied to and accepted by any of theworkstations connected to the server system 150 as described above, ormay be supplied from other sources if desired. Exemplary data andselections utilized by the system are described in some detail below.

III. The Administration Application and Processes

Processes 220 associated with the resident workstations 176, 178, andimplemented with the Administration Application 200 are shown in thealgorithmic flowchart shown in FIG. 3.

At step 222 an administrator or overseer login is accepted. Conventionallogin techniques, including but not limited to user id, password and/orbiometrics login techniques may be utilized at step 222. The logininformation input may then be compared and validated to ensure that onlyauthorized persons are provided further access to the workstation and tothe following process steps.

At step 224, web content “Access Sets” are accepted. Each AdministrationApplication 200 provided enables overseers such as correctional facilityadministrators to create Access Sets which in contemplated embodimentsdefine a list of web content that is deemed to have appropriate contentand therefore identified as accessible for a resident user using thesystem 150. Using the Administration application 200, an overseer maysearch for and view any available web content for possible considerationon an Access Set.

In contemplated embodiments, the facility administrators or otheroverseers, via the administration workstations 176, 178 and the browsersthereof, may enter the name of a particular website or otherwise searchfor web content and proceed to a particular webpage or list of webcontent returned by the browser. Each webpage or web content selected isthen faithfully rendered at the administration workstations 176,178 forthe administrator's or overseer's review. The administrator or overseermay accordingly designate webpages of various different websites forinclusion into an Access Set. Additionally, the administrator oroverseer may designate multiple webpages of the same website to anAccess Set. To ease a burden of numerous webpages of a website to anAccess Set, the administrator can optionally add the entire website or asubsection of the website to more efficiently add webpages to an AccessSet. Further, an administrator may click on each link on a webpage beingreviewed and determine whether or not the webpage associated with eachlink should be added to an Access Set. Such webpage level reviewprovides an ability to finely control access issues that conventionalweb filtering and blocking software that operates on a website levelcannot. That is, the administrator can authorize or prohibit access tospecific webpages on a larger website rather than simply provide access(or not) to a website and all of its webpages as conventional webfilters and blocking software does. The administrator can also authorizeor prohibit access to related webpages by authorizing or prohibitingaccess to the links provided on any particular webpage

Much flexibility is afforded in the page level review and authorizationfeature described. A very granular webpage-by-webpage and link-by-linkaccess authorization scheme via inclusion in an Access Set is possiblefor websites and webpages presenting a mix of objectionable andunobjectionable web content. When appropriate or desired, entirewebsites or subsections of a website may be quickly designated in anAccess Set to considerably speed up the review process by administratorsor overseers that are already familiar with the contents of a websitewithout reviewing it in detail first.

By definition, all webpages (or websites) or web links that are notexplicitly included in an “Access Set” via the AdministrationApplication 200 are deemed as not authorized in the system 150, andbecause no browser is provided at the resident user workstations 180,182 web content that is not in an Access Set cannot be accessed at theresident user workstations 180, 182. Because no browser is provided atthe resident workstations 180, 182, the resident users at theworkstations 180, 182 have no ability to independently search for webcontent, but rather must choose from the web content made available byan Access Set. The resident user has no discretion other than to make aselection from the web content presented at the workstation 180, 182 viathe Resident Application 202 as described below.

As shown at step 226, web content “Trump Sets” are also accepted by theAdministration Application 200. Each Administration Application 200provided enables overseers such as correctional facility administratorsto create Trump Sets which in contemplated embodiments define a list ofweb content (whether entire websites, portions of a website, onlycertain webpages of certain websites, or certain web links) that aredeemed as prohibited from being accessed for a resident user using thesystem 150. The Trump Sets may be created and accepted in asubstantially similar manner to the Access sets by an administrator oroverseer. In contemplated embodiments, the Access and Trump Sets can becreated at the same time for acceptance by the system. That is, for webcontent under review, an administrator or overseer can designate anentire website, portion of a website, an entire webpage of a site, orany link on a webpage for inclusion on the Access Set or the Trump Set.Alternatively, the Access Set and the Trump Set can be independentlydefined and accepted by the system, whether by the same or differentadministrators or overseers.

In contemplated embodiments, each webpage (or entire website) or weblink listed in a Trump Set is tagged with a hard deny. This denial ofaccess trumps any conflicting authorization by an “Access Set.” Thus, ifan administrator or overseer inadvertently assigns or designates awebpage or web links thereof to an Access Set, or perhaps even assignsthe same webpage or web link to both the Asset Set and the Trump Set,any designation of the same webpage or web links on a Trump Set willoverride the Access Set and access will be denied. If the ability tocreate a Trump Set is confined to fewer users than those able to createAccess Sets, denial of access to web content on the Trump Set caneffectively be ensured even when a person creating an Access Set lacksspecific awareness of web content that has been predefined in Trump Set.

In the correctional facility context, the creation and acceptance ofAccess Sets and Trump Sets may be accomplished for resident inmatesindividually or as a group, such that one or more inmates may beprovided with one or more “Access Sets” for the system in use based on auser class as shown at step 228. The user class may be assigned manuallyor automatically.

In the correctional facility context, inmates may be assigned to one ofa plurality of user classes via the Administration Application 200 basedon criteria such as housing (institution and or unit) assignment,privilege level, tentative release date, institution security level,etc. Each user class may be provided with different levels of access bythe system. That is, the residents or inmates can be automaticallyassociated with particular “Access Sets” and/or “Trump Sets” dependingon the resident's or inmate's designation by the correctional facilityagency using other applications of the system 150 or other systems andapplications made available to agency Inmates may be assigned andreassigned over time to different Access Sets and Trump Sets when theirhousing unit or privileged level is changed by the agency. For example,violent offenders may be provided access to different web content thannon-violent inmates via differently defined Access Sets and Trump Setstailored to the needs and concerns associated with each resident/inmategroup user class. Internet access may also be extended as revocableprivilege that can be suspended or modified in response to specificbehaviors and incidents involving particular inmates or residents.

In addition to manually assigning inmates to Access/Trump Sets at steps228, the system, via the Administration Application 200, interfaces withother correctional facility systems in some embodiments to automaticallyadd (and remove) inmates from the accepted user classes. For any givenresident or inmate that is reassigned from one resident or inmate groupuser class to another resident or inmate group user class, the AccessSet and Trump Sets of the new group will automatically be applied forthat resident

As shown at step 230, a class of service may also be accepted. The classof service is defined with the administration application 200 and incomplementary embodiments sets time(s) of day the resident/inmateapplication(s) 202 can be used, a maximum duration of a resident accesssession, an amount of time between sessions for each resident/inmate, amaximum time allowed per day per resident/inmate, a maximum time allowedper week per resident/inmate, etc. The class of service may be assignedmanually to individual residents/inmates or may be assigned as a groupbased on similar considerations to the user class as discussed above inrelation to step 228. The service class allows the institutionalfacility to control time spent by an inmate and to preventmonopolization of resources. Multiple service classes may be definedwith different parameters, and any change in the class of service for aninmate may be automatically applied by the system 150.

After initial setup, the Administration Application 200 allows facilityadministrators to easily edit, modify and disable particular “AccessSets” and “Trump Sets” for use by the system as shown at steps 232, 234and 236. When editing the sets at step 232 and 234, web pages may andlinks may be added, subtracted, or re-designated for inclusion on one ormore Access Sets or Trump Sets. Very fine changes are possible, and theAccess Sets and Trump Sets can be optimally refined, expanded orcontracted over time. Sets created and accepted can be disabled as agroup as shown at step 236 to temporally suspend access or denial of webcontent for troubleshooting purposes or other purposes.

As shown at step 238, once a website, webpage or web links aredesignated for inclusion on an Access Set or a Trump Set, when thatwebsite, webpage or web link is again visited at the workstations 176 or178, the Administration Application 200 will show the administrator oroverseer the portions of the web page that have been listed in an“Access Set” or “Trump Set” already associated with that website,webpage or web link. As such, at some subsequent time after initialsetup, an administrator or overseer may again view the web content andquickly assess which portions of the page have been designated as AccessSet or Trump Set and make edits to the designation if desired.

As shown at step 240, categorization preferences are accepted. EachAdministration Application 200 enables a facility administrator oroverseer (e.g., a correctional facility officer) to categorize webpagesin an Access Set so that it is easier for residents (e.g., inmates) tofind authorized web content that meet a particular purpose. For example,website, web page or web link categorization may include category itemssuch as job sites, legal information, social benefits programs,identification documents, etc. Webpages in the Trump Sets may besimilarly categorized if desired using the Administration Application200 for the benefit facility administrators.

As shown at step 242, printing preferences are accepted. Using theAdministration Application 200, an administrator or overseer can setwhether particular web content of an Access Set can be printed by theresident or inmate, and also whether the print function has a monetarycost or fee associated with it. This can be determined for each item ofweb content on an Access List individually or collectively. If aprinting fee is chargeable, the system 150 can automatically process andcharge any fees to an inmate's or resident's account when the inmatechooses to print a selected item of web content. Alternatively,processing of fees can be performed by other systems or otherapplications available to administrators of an institutional facility.

As shown at step 244, web content input preferences are accepted. Usingthe Administration Application 200, an administrator or overseer can setwhether an input element such as mouse, keyboard or keypad is enabled ordisabled. Thus, an inmate may be allowed or precluded from clicking,typing, or otherwise entering information on a webpage, eitherindividually or based on user class or service class considerations. Webcontent input preferences may be assigned manually or automatically indifferent embodiments of the system 150.

At step 246, a resident user experience may be emulated by theAdministration Application 200 to ensure that the desired selectionshave been made via steps described above. The Administration Application200 includes an inmate application emulator, which allows a facilityadministrator or overseer (e.g., a correctional facility officer) totemporarily set themselves as a member of a particular user class andservice class to test the performance of the associated Access Set andTrump Set for a resident/inmate or resident/inmate group. The emulatorallows the administrator to evaluate the effective rights and userexperience of a resident/inmate having the chosen membership, and theadministrator may make any necessary corrections or modifications beforethe inmate is actually allowed to use the Access Set.

As shown at step 248, enable/disenable workstation preferences areaccepted. The Administration Application 200 may identify workstationsthat are allowed to offer (or disallowed) form offering the ResidentApplication 202. For example, and via the Administration Application200, only one of the workstations 180, 182 shown in FIG. 3 may make theinmate application 202 available. Also, and via the AdministrationApplication 200, which of the workstations 180, 182 presents theResident Application 202 may be changed. Much flexibility is providedhere. The workstations 180, 182 may make the Resident Application 202available one at a time for certain periods of time, or may make theResident Application 202 available simultaneously at differentworkstations.

As shown at step 250, once the other steps have been satisfactorilycompleted, the Administration Application 200 sends the Access/TrumpSets and all the preferences and parameters discussed above to theSecure Access Server 204 (FIG. 3) for processing of selections made by auser at the resident workstations 180, 182. Once the Access Sets and theTrump Sets are created, including all the preferences and the parametersdiscussed above, the system 150 will dynamically compute the list of webcontent to which the particular the inmate has access rights by addingall permissions from his/her membership in “Access Sets” and thensubtracting all webpages/sites disallowed by the membership in “TrumpSets.”

Once the information for Access Sets, Trump Sets and preferences is sentto the Secure Access Server at step 250, it may be retrieved formodification, editing and inclusion of new web content and differentselection of preferences using the steps described above. The steps maybe repeated to create and accept any number of different Access or TrumpSets desired.

Having described the algorithmic processes of the AdministrationApplication 200, it is believed that those in the art may program thoseprocesses to embody them on a non-transitory a computer readable mediumhaving segments of code implementing and effectuating the featuresdescribed in the Administration Application 200 running at theworkstations 176, 178 or another computer device without furtherexplanation.

IV. The Resident Application and Processes

Processes 260 associated with the resident workstations 180, 182, andimplemented with the Resident Application 202 are shown in thealgorithmic flowchart shown in FIG. 5.

Each Resident Application 202 provides a secure application for use by aresident (e.g., an inmate). In contemplated embodiments the Residentapplication requires residents to log into the application usingcombination of user id, password and/or biometrics as shown at step 262.The login information input may then be compared and validated to ensurethat only authorized persons are provided further access to theworkstation 180 and 182 and to the following process steps. Theresident's user class and service class may be tied to the login so thatit can be taken into account.

Once the resident (e.g., an inmate) is logged in at step 262, theResident Application 202 displays a list of web content (e.g., the listof authorized web pages for the particular inmate identified at login)at step 264, which is retrieved from the Secure Access Server 204 basedon the user's credentials as determined from the login. In contemplatedembodiments, the retrieval of the list of web pages authorized is madein real time so that any changes made by facility administrators areimmediately applied and enforced. The list of authorized web pages isdynamically created and is categorized for ease of use as determined bythe processes 220 as shown and described in relation to FIG. 4 acceptingthe inputs from administrators and overseers.

As mentioned previously, there is no opportunity or place for theresident (e.g., an inmate) to type in a name of a website or webpage tovisit, or otherwise to enter search criteria. Rather, the resident mustmake a selection from the list presented at step 264.

At step 266, a selection of the web content presented is accepted. Forexample, the resident user may click on a web link displayed in the webcontent list to accept a selection.

At step 208, the selection is sent to the Secure Access Server 204 andthe resident application 202 awaits at step 270 validation from theSecure Access Server 204 and the Secure Access Application 206.

If the selection is validated at step 270, the web content is displayedat step 272. The displayed web content is now confirmed as authorizedand is faithfully rendered per the webpage author's design. In otherwords, the selected webpage's dependencies on other websites and linksto other webpages are correctly displayed if access is authorized andvalidated at step 270. The resident at the workstation 280, 282 can thenproceed to review the web content of the page; and follow its links toother related webpages to the extent authorized. The system continues toaccept and validate the selections at steps 268, 270 with each selectionmade.

If the selection is not validated at step 270, access to the web contentis denied and a notification to the user is provided at step 274. Theuser may then make another selection and steps 266, 268 and 270 arerepeated.

Once web content is displayed at step 272, the resident may choose toprint the content and or make inputs as shown at steps 274 and 276. Theaccepted inputs from steps 274 and 276 are granted or denied accordingto the preferences set in steps 242, 244 of FIG. 4 by an administratoror overseer.

Any service class parameters are automatically applied starting at thetime of login. The resident user may be provided with feedback regardingcurrent and previous session use, time remaining until applicable limitsare reached, etc. Warnings and notification may be provided asapplicable limits are approached, and automatic logoff features may beimplemented to ensure that the limits are not exceeded.

Having described the algorithmic processes of the Resident Application202, it is believed that those in the art may program those processes toembody them on a non-transitory computer readable medium having segmentsof code implementing and effectuating the features described in theResident Application 202 running on the workstations 180, 182 or anothercomputer device without further explanation.

IV. The Secure Access Server Application and Processes

Processes 300 associated with the Secure Access Server 204, andimplemented with the Secure Access Application 206 are shown in thealgorithmic flowchart shown in FIG. 6.

At step 302, the Secure Access Server 304 receives the Access/Set Trumpsets as defined by the administrator or overseer using theAdministration Application processes of FIG. 4.

At step 306, the system 150, via the Secure Access Application Server204 and the Secure Access Application 206, receives a requestedselection for web content from a resident (e.g., an inmate) via theResident Application 202 and the processes shown in FIG. 5. When theresident/inmate clicks a link on the web content displayed by theResident Application 202, the accepted link is sent to the Secure AccessServer 204. The Secure Access Application 206 then confirms that theresident has the right to access the web content.

In contemplated embodiments, the Secure Access Application 206 retrievesthe Access Set and Trump Set for the resident. In contemplatedembodiments this retrieval is made in real time as each request is madeat step 306 to ensure that any changes made by facility administratorsare immediately affected and enforced.

At step 310, the Secure Access Application 206 compares the Request tothe retrieved Access and Trump Sets.

If the resident request is in the Access Set, but not in the Trump Set,the request is validated. The validation is logged at step 311 and avalidation is sent to the resident station at step 312. At step 313 theSecure Access Application 206 retrieves the authorized web content(e.g., the authorized webpage) from the web via the Secure Access Server204 (FIG. 3) and sends the authorized web content to the ResidentApplication 202.

If the resident requested web content is not in the Access Set, oralternatively if the requested web content is in the Trump Set, therequest is denied at step 311 and a notification is sent to the residentstation at step 314. The inmate does not have authorization to accessthe requested content. The Secure Access Application may then return tostep 302 and await another resident request.

At step 311, the validation or denial event is logged and stored forfuture retrieval. The system, via the Secure Access Server 204 and theSecure Access Application 206, will log key data (date/time, webpage,inmate and workstation details, etc.) about each successful delivery ofauthorized content to a resident (e.g., an inmate).

The system 150, via the Secure Access Server 204 and/or the SecureAccess Application 206, may also analyze logged validation and denialevents to detect usage trends and, as appropriate, suggest toadministrators that changes to the Access/Trump Sets and preferencesaccepted via the processes shown in FIG. 4 are advisable.

Having described the algorithmic processes of the Secure AccessApplication 206, it is believed that those in the art may program thoseprocesses to embody them on a non-transitory computer readable mediumhaving segments of code implementing and effectuating the featuresdescribed in the Secure Access Application 206 running on the SecureAccess Server 104 or another computer device without furtherexplanation.

VI. System and Process Adaptations

The systems and processes of the invention are not limited to thespecific embodiments described herein. Components of each system andeach process can be practiced independent and separate from othercomponents and processes described herein. Each component and processalso can be used in combination with other components, systems andprocesses. Varying degrees of complexity and functionality may beprovided for cost management reasons and to meet the needs of particularenvironments and/or particular system users. It should now be apparentthat the system components and functionality may be mixed and matched togenerate varying systems which obtain the benefits of the presentinvention to varying degrees.

The benefits of the inventive concepts are now believed to be evidentand amply illustrated in view of the exemplary embodiments disclosed.Secure access and redundant checks are provided to meet the needs ofinstitutional environments and ensure access exclusively topre-authorized web content and minimizing, if not obviating, anyopportunity for an institutional resident to conduct mischief on theInternet or otherwise inappropriately use or obtain web content. TheInternet access and regulation systems described record detailed data asthe system operates and allow efficient tracking and monitoring ofresident usage of the system so that system usage can be studied ingreat detail and optimized. The access and regulation systems may berather easily set up and modified by administrators and overseers, andmuch flexibility is afforded to optimize the system to meet particularobjective and needs to implement and maintain a secured controlledenvironment for institutional residents and other users.

An embodiment of exemplary Internet access authorization and regulationsystem has been disclosed, including: a first computer configured toaccept an Access Set of web accessible content and a Trump Set ofprohibited web content; a second computer configured to display apredetermined list of web accessible content and accept a selection fromthe predetermined list; a server configured to accept the selection fromthe predetermined list and compare the selection to the Access Set andto the Trump Set; and if the accepted selection is in the Access Set butnot in the Trump Set, provide access to the selected web content fromthe predetermined list at the second computer.

Optionally, if the accepted selection is in the Access Set and is in theTrump Set, access to the selected web content is refused by the systemat the second computer. At least one of the first and second computersmay be located in an institutional facility housing residents in acontrolled manner. The institutional facility may be a correctionalfacility and the residents may be inmates. The Access Set may include atleast one webpage, and the Access Set may be categorized by a user ofthe first computer. The second computer may be configured to accept abiometric identifier for a user.

The first computer may optionally be configured to accept a serviceclass, wherein the service class determines an access time to thesystem. The service class may be assigned to each user of the secondcomputer, and the system may be configured to automatically apply theassigned service class to a user of the second computer. The user may bean inmate of a correctional facility.

The first computer may further be optionally configured to accept a userclass, and at least one of the Access Set and the Trump set may bedefined by the user class. The user class may be assigned to each userof the second computer, and the system may be configured toautomatically apply the assigned user class to a user of the secondcomputer. The user may be an inmate of a correctional facility.

As still further options, the first computer may also accept a selectioncorresponding to whether or not at least one of the items in the AccessSet displayed on the second computer can be printed. The first computermay be configured to accept a selection whether a fee will be charged ifat least one of the items in the Access Set is printed. The firstcomputer may be configured to emulate a user experience of a personusing the second computer. The first computer may be configured toaccept a selection whether an input element of the second computer isenabled or disabled when at least one of the items in the Access Set isaccepted. The input element may be one of a keyboard and a keypad.

At least one of the first and second computers may be selected from thegroup of a workstation, a personal computer, a notebook or laptopcomputer, a computer kiosk, and a tablet computer.

Another embodiment of an Internet access authorization and regulationsystem has been disclosed, including: a first computer having anadministration application configured to accept a first set ofauthorized web accessible content and a second set of prohibited webcontent; a second computer having a user application configured todisplay a predetermined list of web content and accept a user selectiontherefrom; wherein the system is configured to compare the accepted userselection to at least one of the first and second sets to determinewhether the request is valid; and if the accepted selection isdetermined to be valid, provide access to the selected web content atthe second computer.

Optionally, the system may include a secure access server interfacingthe first and second computers, the secure access server beingconfigured to compare the accepted user selection to at least one of thefirst and second sets to determine whether the request is valid. If theaccepted selection is in the first set and is not in the second set,access to the selected web content is refused at the second computer bythe system.

At least one the first and second computers may be located in aninstitutional facility housing residents in a controlled manner. Theinstitutional facility may be a correctional facility and the residentsmay be inmates.

The first and second sets may each include a list of webpages. Thesecond computer may be configured to accept a biometric identifier for auser.

The first computer may be configured to accept a service classregulating an access time to the predetermined list of web content. Theservice class may be assigned to each user of the second computer, andthe system may be configured to automatically apply the assigned serviceclass to a user of the second computer.

The first computer may also be configured to accept a user class, and atleast one of the first set of authorized web accessible content and thesecond set of prohibited web content may be defined by the user class. Auser class may be assigned to each user of the second computer, and thesystem may be configured to automatically apply the assigned user classto a user of the second computer.

The first computer may accept selection corresponding to whether or notat least one of the items in the predetermined list of web contentdisplayed on the second computer can be printed. The first computer isfurther configured to accept a selection whether a fee will be chargedif at least one of the items in the predetermined list of web content isprinted. The first computer may be configured to emulate a userexperience of a person using the second computer.

The first computer may be configured to accept a selection whether aninput element of the second computer is enabled or disabled when atleast one of the items in the predetermined list of web content isselected. The input element may be one of a keyboard and a keypad.

A method of providing secure access to web content has also beendisclosed, the method including: accepting a first set of authorized webaccessible content and a second set of prohibited web content with afirst computer having an administration application; displaying apredetermined list of web content with a second computer having a userapplication; accepting a user selection from the predetermined lies ofweb content with the second computer; comparing the accepted userselection to at least one of the first and second sets to determinewhether the accepted user selection is valid; and providing access tothe selected web content at the second computer if the acceptedselection is determined to be valid.

Optionally, the first and second computers may be interfaced with asecure access server, and comparing the accepted user selection to atleast one of the first and second sets to determine whether the requestis valid is performed by the secure access server. The method mayinclude refusing access to the selected web content at the secondcomputer if the accepted user selection is in the first set and is notin the second set.

The method may include locating at least one the first and secondcomputers in an institutional facility housing residents in a controlledmanner. More specifically, the method may include locating at least onethe first and second computers in a correctional facility housinginmates in a controlled manner.

The method may include accepting a first set of authorized webaccessible content and a second set of prohibited web content with afirst computer having an administration application, and accepting atleast one webpage on the first list and the second list.

The method may include accepting a biometric identifier with the secondcomputer.

The method may include accepting a service class regulating an accesstime to the predetermined list of web content with the first computer. Aservice class may be assigned to each user of the second computer, andthe method may include automatically applying the assigned service classto a user of the second computer. The method may include accepting auser class with the first computer, and at least one of the first set ofauthorized web accessible content and the second set of prohibited webcontent being defined by the user class. A user class may be assigned toeach user of the second computer, and the method may includeautomatically applying the assigned user class to a user of the secondcomputer.

The method may also include accepting a selection with the firstcomputer that corresponds to whether or not at least one of the items inthe predetermined list of web content displayed on the second computercan be printed. The method may include accepting a selection from thefirst computer whether a fee will be charged if at least one of theitems in the predetermined list of web content is printed. The methodmay include emulating, with the first computer, a user experience of aperson using the second computer. The method may include accepting, withthe first computer, a selection whether an input element of the secondcomputer is enabled or disabled when at least one of the items in thepredetermined list of web content is selected. The input element may beone of a keyboard and a keypad. The method may include comparing theaccepted user selection to at least one of the first and second sets todetermine whether the accepted user selection is valid comprisescomparing the accepted user selection to both of the first and secondsets to determine whether the accepted user selection is valid.

A computer program embodied on a non-transitory computer readable mediumfor processing a request for web content by a resident of aninstitutional facility has also been disclosed. The request for webcontent is selected from a list of web pages displayed to the resident,and the program includes at least one code segment that: receives therequest for web content from the inmate, and, in response to thereceived request: retrieves a first predetermined set of authorized webaccessible content and a second predetermined set of prohibited webcontent as determined by an administrator of the institutional facility;compares the received request to at least one of the first and secondpredetermined sets to determine whether the received request is valid;and provides access to the requested web page if the accepted selectionis determined to be valid.

Optionally, the at least one code segment compares the accepted userselection to both of the first and second sets to determine whether theaccepted user selection is valid. The at least one code segment mayrefuse access to the requested web content at the second computer if theaccepted user selection is in the first set and is not in the secondset.

This written description uses examples to disclose the invention,including the best mode, and also to enable any person skilled in theart to practice the invention, including making and using any devices orsystems and performing any incorporated methods. The patentable scope ofthe invention is defined by the claims, and may include other examplesthat occur to those skilled in the art. Such other examples are intendedto be within the scope of the claims if they have structural elementsthat do not differ from the literal language of the claims, or if theyinclude equivalent structural elements with insubstantial differencesfrom the literal languages of the claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. An Internet access authorization and regulationsystem, comprising: at least one first computer configured to accept anAccess Set of web accessible content and a Trump Set of prohibited webcontent each respectively determined by at least one user that is anoverseer; at least one second computer that does not include a webbrowser, the at least one second computer configured to display, withoutproviding any ability to the user that is overseen to input or otherwisesearch for web content, a predetermined list of authorized webaccessible content to a user that is overseen and also to accept aselection from the predetermined list of authorized web accessiblecontent made by the user that is overseen; and a server configured to:receive the accepted selection made by the user that is overseen fromthe predetermined list of authorized web accessible content displayed atthe least one second computer; compare the accepted selection made bythe user that is overseen to the Access Set and to the Trump Setaccepted by the at least one first computer; and if the acceptedselection is in the Access Set but not in the Trump Set, provide theuser that is overseen access to the accepted selection at the at leastone second computer.
 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the server isfurther configured to: if the accepted selection is in the Access Setand is in the Trump Set, refuse the user that is overseen access to theaccepted selection at the at least one second computer.
 3. The system ofclaim 1, wherein one of the at least one first computer and the at leastone second computer is located in an institutional facility housingresident users that are overseen in a controlled manner.
 4. The systemof claim 1, wherein one of the at least one first computer and the atleast one second computer is located in a correctional facility housinginmates.
 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the Access Set of webaccessible content includes at least one webpage.
 6. The system of claim1, wherein the at least one second computer is configured to accept abiometric identifier for the user that is overseen.
 7. The system ofclaim 1, wherein the at least one first computer is configured to accepta service class from the at least one user that is an overseer, whereinthe service class determines an access time to the at least one secondcomputer by the user that is overseen.
 8. The system of claim 7, whereinthe service class is assigned to each one of a plurality of users thatare overseen, and wherein the system is configured to automaticallyapply the assigned service class to each respective user that isoverseen of when provided access to the at least one second computer. 9.The system of claim 7, wherein the user that is overseen is an inmate ofa correctional facility.
 10. The system of claim 1, wherein the at leastone first computer is configured to assign at least one user class for aplurality of users that are overseen and provided access to the at leastone second computer, and wherein at least one of the Access Set and theTrump set is determined for the at least one user class by the overseerat the at least one first computer.
 11. The system of claim 10, whereinthe at least one user class comprises a plurality of different userclasses, and wherein one of the plurality of different user classes isassigned to each respective one of the plurality of users that areoverseen and provided access to the at least one second computer, andwherein the system is configured to automatically apply the assigneduser class to each of the plurality of users logging onto the at leastone second computer.
 12. The system of claim 10, wherein the user thatis overseen is an inmate in a correctional facility.
 13. The system ofclaim 1, wherein the Access Set is categorized by the at least oneoverseer with the at least one first computer.
 14. The system of claim1, wherein the at least one first computer accepts a selection from theat least one overseer corresponding to whether or not an acceptedselection made by the user that is overseen on the second computer canbe printed if permission to print to the accepted selection isauthorized.
 15. The system of claim 14, wherein the at least one firstcomputer is configured to accept a selection from the at least oneoverseer whether a fee will be charged to the user that is overseen ifan accepted selection is printed.
 16. The system of claim 1, wherein theat least one first computer is configured to emulate an experience ofthe user that is overseen when provided access to the second computer.17. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one first computer isconfigured to accept a selection from the at least one overseer whetheran input element of the at least one second computer is enabled ordisabled when access to the accepted selection is provided to the userthat is overseen.
 18. The system of claim 17, wherein the input elementof the at least one second computer that is enabled or disabled is atleast one of a keyboard or a keypad.
 19. The system of claim 1, whereinthe at least one first computer and the at least one second computer isselected from the group of a workstation, a personal computer, anotebook or laptop computer, a computer kiosk, or a tablet computer. 20.An Internet access authorization and regulation system, comprising: afirst computer having an administration application configured to accepta first set of authorized web accessible content and a second set ofprohibited web content from at least one administrator; a secondcomputer that is not provided with a web browser, the second computerhaving a overseen user application configured to display, withoutproviding any ability to a user that is overseen to input or otherwisesearch for web content, a predetermined list of web content and accept arequested selection from the predetermined list of web content; whereinthe system is configured to compare the accepted selection from theoverseen user application to at least one of the first set of authorizedweb accessible content and the second set of prohibited web content fromthe administration application to validate access to the acceptedselection; and if the accepted selection is validated, provide access tothe requested accepted selection via the overseen user application ofthe second computer.
 21. The system of claim 20, further comprising asecure access server interfacing the first and second computers, thesecure access server being configured to compare the accepted selectionfrom the overseen user application to at least one of the first andsecond sets from the administration application to validate access tothe accepted selection.
 22. The system of claim 20, wherein if theaccepted selection is in the first set of authorized web accessiblecontent and is in the second set of prohibited web content, the acceptedselection is not validated and access to the accepted selection isrefused via the overseen user application at the second computer. 23.The system of claim 20, wherein at least one the first and secondcomputers is located in an institutional facility housing residents in acontrolled manner.
 24. The system of claim 23, wherein the institutionalfacility is a correctional facility and the residents are inmates. 25.The system of claim 20, wherein the first set of authorized webaccessible content and the second set of prohibited web content eachcomprises a list of webpages.
 26. The system of claim 20, wherein thesecond computer is configured to accept a biometric identifier for theuser that is overseen.
 27. The system of claim 20, wherein the firstcomputer is configured to accept a service class regulating an accesstime to the predetermined list of web content.
 28. The system of claim27, wherein the service class comprises a plurality of different serviceclasses, and wherein one of the different service classes is assigned toeach of a plurality of users that are overseen at the second computer,and wherein the system is configured to automatically apply the assignedservice class as each one of the plurality of users logs onto the secondcomputer.
 29. The system of claim 20, wherein the first computer isconfigured to accept a user class, and at least one of the first set ofauthorized web accessible content and the second set of prohibited webcontent being defined by the user class.
 30. The system of claim 20,wherein a user class is assigned to each user that is overseen at thesecond computer, and wherein the system is configured to automaticallyapply the assigned user class to each user that is overseen when loggingonto the second computer.
 31. The system of claim 20, wherein theadministration application of the first computer is configured to accepta selection corresponding to whether or not at least one of the items inthe predetermined list of web content displayed on the second computercan be printed.
 32. The system of claim 31, wherein the administrationapplication of the first computer is configured to accept a selectionwhether a fee will be charged if at least one of the items in thepredetermined list of web content is printed.
 33. The system of claim20, wherein the administration application of the first computer isconfigured to emulate a user experience of a person using the overseenuser application of the second computer.
 34. The system of claim 20,wherein the administration application of the first computer isconfigured to accept a selection whether an input element of the secondcomputer is enabled or disabled when a requested selection is validated.35. The system of claim 34, wherein the input element of the secondcomputer is one of a keyboard and a keypad.
 36. A method of providingsecure access to web content, the method comprising: accepting a firstset of authorized web accessible content and a second set of prohibitedweb content with a first computer having an administration application;displaying a predetermined list of web content with a second computerhaving a user application and that does not include a web browser andwherein the second computer does not provide any ability to the user tosearch for web content or request web content apart from thepredetermined list of web content; accepting a user selection from thepredetermined list of web content with the second computer; comparingthe accepted user selection to at least one of the first set ofauthorized web accessible content and the second set of prohibited webcontent to determine whether the accepted user selection is valid; andproviding access to the web content of the accepted user selection atthe second computer if the accepted selection is determined to be valid.37. The method of claim 36, wherein the first and second computers areinterfaced with a secure access server, and wherein comparing theaccepted user selection to at least one of the first set of authorizedweb accessible content and the second set of prohibited web content todetermine whether the request is valid is performed by the secure accessserver.
 38. The method of claim 36, further comprising refusing accessto the accepted user selection at the second computer if the accepteduser selection is in the first set and is in the second set.
 39. Themethod of claim 36, further comprising locating at least one the firstand second computers in an institutional facility housing residents in acontrolled manner.
 40. The method of claim 36, further comprisinglocating at least one of the first and second computers in acorrectional facility housing inmates in a controlled manner.
 41. Themethod of claim 36, wherein accepting the first set of authorized webaccessible content with a first computer having an administrationapplication comprises accepting at least one webpage.
 42. The method ofclaim 36, further comprising accepting a biometric identifier with thesecond computer.
 43. The method of claim 36, further comprisingaccepting a service class regulating an access time to the predeterminedlist of web content with the second computer.
 44. The method of claim43, wherein accepting the service class comprises accepting a pluralityof different service classes that are respectively assigned to each oneof a plurality of users of the second computer, and wherein the methodcomprises automatically applying the assigned service class to when eachone of the plurality of users log onto the second computer.
 45. Themethod of claim 36, further comprising accepting a user class with thefirst computer, and at least one of the first set of authorized webaccessible content and the second set of prohibited web content beingdefined by the user class.
 46. The method of claim 45, wherein one of aplurality of different user classes are assigned to each user of thesecond computer, and the method comprising automatically applying theassigned user class to each user that logs onto the second computer. 47.The method of claim 36, further comprising accepting a selection withthe first computer that corresponds to whether or not at least one ofthe items in the predetermined list of web content displayed on thesecond computer can be printed when the accepted selection is determinedto be valid.
 48. The method of claim 47, further comprising accepting aselection from the first computer whether a fee will be charged if atleast one of the items in the predetermined list of web content on thesecond computer is printed when the accepted selection is determined tobe valid.
 49. The method of claim 47, further comprising emulating, withthe first computer, a user experience of a person using the secondcomputer.
 50. The method of claim 36, further comprising accepting, withthe first computer, a selection whether an input element of the secondcomputer is enabled or disabled when the accepted selection isdetermined to be valid.
 51. The method of claim 50, wherein the inputelement of the second computer is one of a keyboard or a keypad.
 52. Themethod of claim 36, wherein comparing the accepted user selection to atleast one of the first set of authorized web accessible content and thesecond set of prohibited web content to determine whether the accepteduser selection is valid comprises comparing the accepted user selectionto both of the first set of authorized web accessible content and thesecond set of prohibited web content to determine whether the accepteduser selection is valid.
 53. A computer program embodied on anon-transitory computer readable medium for processing a request for webcontent by a resident of an institutional facility, the request for webcontent being selected from a list of web pages displayed to theresident, the program comprising at least one code segment that:receives the request for web content from the inmate, wherein therequest is made from a predetermined list of web content withoututilizing a web browser and without providing any ability to the user tosearch for web content or request web content apart from thepredetermined list of web content, and, in response to the receivedrequest: retrieves a first predetermined set of authorized webaccessible content and a second predetermined set of prohibited webcontent as determined by an administrator of the institutional facility;compares the received request to at least one of the first and secondpredetermined sets to determine whether the received request is valid;and retrieves the requested web content if the accepted selection isdetermined to be valid.
 54. The computer program of claim 53, whereinthe at least one code segment compares the accepted user selection toboth of the first predetermined set of authorized web accessible contentand the second predetermined set of prohibited web content to determinewhether the accepted user selection is valid.
 55. The computer programof claim 54, wherein the at least one code segment refuses access to therequested web content at the second computer if the accepted userselection is in the first predetermined set of authorized web accessiblecontent and is also in the second predetermined set of prohibited webcontent.